We have some very, very good news for Europeans (which happens to include myself): we have the European Parliament on our sides when it comes to battling ACTA. If you may recall, ACTA is basically an attempt by the US to impose upon the rest of the world draconian measures like three strikes laws and the DMCA. All parties within the European Parliament have together put forth a resolution that would effectively tackle ACTA.

Holy crap - since when is downloading copyrighted content akin to child pornography? Does the RIAA have an army of grown men raping a little girl every time I download a song?

Oh so you don't believe in a total right to privacy on the internet. You just want privacy when people are downloading copyrighted material. Got it.

I'm guessing you support undermining copyright laws out of spite towards the entertainment industries.

You can hate Hollywood and record companies without supporting widespread piracy which undermines indy producers as well. In fact Hollywood and the large record companies are in a better position to withstand the elimination of copyright laws than small producers.

There will always be box office and controlled release sales for Hollywood and music companies can always tour their big hits. You would be destroying the itunes revenue of the overweight jazz artist who can only make money by depending on copyright. Programmers can't go on tour either which means you would put millions of geeks out of work if you just allowed everyone to download whatever they wanted.

Oh so you don't believe in a total right to privacy on the internet. You just want privacy when people are downloading copyrighted material. Got it.

Erm, you still don't get it, do you?

I live in a country where downloading is NOT illegal. As such, it makes no sense to violate people's privacy to counter something that IS NOT ILLEGAL. Child pornography IS illegal, and as such, it makes total sense to combat it.

You might not care about Dutch law, but I personally kinda do, since I, uhm, live here. When I go to the US, I will respect your laws as well. I will not download anything when I'm in the US, because I know it's against US law.

I would like you to apologise for repeatedly branding me a criminal, without any form of proof or whatsoever. I'm not the first person you've repeatedly branded a criminal on the OSNews boards, and as the admin here, I cannot stand idly by. I'm giving you the opportunity to apologise to me; if you refuse, I'll have to take further action.

It is your prerogative to profess your opinion, but it is not your prerogative to brand me a criminal without proof. What you are doing is defamation, and that's against the law.

No I will not respect a law that I find to be highly unprincipled. If I visited a country I would follow the laws but that does not mean that I have to accept them as a valid rationalization for the behavior that they allow.

Allowing people to download cloned content without any incentive to purchase it from the people who created that content is an acceptance of piracy. Call it what you want but the results are the same.

If you implemented such a system worldwide you would destroy millions of paychecks that go to the technically minded who were miserable in high school but can now make a living by doing something they love. The two guys a few blocks from me that make a very average living by selling a niche Mac utility would see their business destroyed if people could download a clone instead of paying them.

As for an apology there is no proof that you torrent movies and though that comment was made in jest I take it back none the less.

Though my nick is "nt_jerkface" it is really an inside joke from another blog and should probably be changed. I think it might too often give the impression that I have some attachment to the NT kernel, which is false. I actually spend a lot more time reading about Unix kernels.

So if you want to kill my account then that's fine because my nick is a poor representation in the first place. I'd rather not have my ip banned but that is of course up to you.

You know, there is a middle-ground between "invasive enforcement and penalties completely disproportionate to the offense" and "ZOMG ABOLISH COPYRIGHT." Just because you think the DMCA's anticircumvention clause is a bad thing doesn't mean you're a Damned Commie.